7 Rhode Island opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Rhode Island courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Charles Ponagreen2 sentences2018Batson , 476 U.S. at 96 -98 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 ; see also Pona II , 66 A.3d at 472 . 2014The United States Supreme Court has “delineated a tripartite test for determining whether a criminal defendant has been denied equal protection of the laws by the state’s use of a peremptory challenge.” Pona I, 926 A.2d at 601 (citing Batson, 476 U.S. at 96-98 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 ). *805 First, a defendant is required to “establish a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination[.]” Pona II, 66 A.3d at 472 (quoting Pona I, 926 A.2d at 601 ). | 1 | 2 |
Arizona v. Youngbloodgreen2 sentences1997We observed that together, California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479, 485 , 104 S.Ct. 2528, 2532 , 81 L.Ed.2d 413, 419 (1984), and Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51, 55 , 109 S.Ct. 333, 336 , 102 L.Ed.2d 281, 287 (1988), “established a tripartite test to determine whether a defendant’s due-process rights have been infringed by the failure of law *570 enforcement personnel to preserve evidence.” Garcia, 643 A.2d at 185 . 1997We observed that together, California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479, 485 , 104 S.Ct. 2528, 2532 , 81 L.Ed.2d 413, 419 (1984), and Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51, 55 , 109 S.Ct. 333, 336 , 102 L.Ed.2d 281, 287 (1988), “established a tripartite test to determine whether a defendant’s due-process rights have been infringed by the failure of law *570 enforcement personnel to preserve evidence.” Garcia, 643 A.2d at 185 . | 1 | 2 |
State v. Garciagreen2 sentences2003As this Court previously discussed in State v. Garcia, 643 A.2d 180, 185 (R.I.1994), the Supreme Court of the United States has placed a strong emphasis upon the bad faith element of the tripartite test. 1997We observed that together, California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479, 485 , 104 S.Ct. 2528, 2532 , 81 L.Ed.2d 413, 419 (1984), and Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51, 55 , 109 S.Ct. 333, 336 , 102 L.Ed.2d 281, 287 (1988), “established a tripartite test to determine whether a defendant’s due-process rights have been infringed by the failure of law *570 enforcement personnel to preserve evidence.” Garcia, 643 A.2d at 185 . | 1 | 2 |
California v. Trombettagreen2 sentences1997We observed that together, California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479, 485 , 104 S.Ct. 2528, 2532 , 81 L.Ed.2d 413, 419 (1984), and Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51, 55 , 109 S.Ct. 333, 336 , 102 L.Ed.2d 281, 287 (1988), “established a tripartite test to determine whether a defendant’s due-process rights have been infringed by the failure of law *570 enforcement personnel to preserve evidence.” Garcia, 643 A.2d at 185 . 1997We observed that together, California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479, 485 , 104 S.Ct. 2528, 2532 , 81 L.Ed.2d 413, 419 (1984), and Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 U.S. 51, 55 , 109 S.Ct. 333, 336 , 102 L.Ed.2d 281, 287 (1988), “established a tripartite test to determine whether a defendant’s due-process rights have been infringed by the failure of law *570 enforcement personnel to preserve evidence.” Garcia, 643 A.2d at 185 . | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Rhode Island. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Batson v. Kentucky
green
2 sentences2014The United States Supreme Court has “delineated a tripartite test for determining whether a criminal defendant has been denied equal protection of the laws by the state’s use of a peremptory challenge.” Pona I, 926 A.2d at 601 (citing Batson, 476 U.S. at 96-98 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 ). *805 First, a defendant is required to “establish a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination[.]” Pona II, 66 A.3d at 472 (quoting Pona I, 926 A.2d at 601 ). 2014The United States Supreme Court has “delineated a tripartite test for determining whether a criminal defendant has been denied equal protection of the laws by the state’s use of a peremptory challenge.” Pona I, 926 A.2d at 601 (citing Batson, 476 U.S. at 96-98 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 ). *805 First, a defendant is required to “establish a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination[.]” Pona II, 66 A.3d at 472 (quoting Pona I, 926 A.2d at 601 ). | 3 | 2007–2018 |
State v. Pona.
green
2 sentences2014The United States Supreme Court has “delineated a tripartite test for determining whether a criminal defendant has been denied equal protection of the laws by the state’s use of a peremptory challenge.” Pona I, 926 A.2d at 601 (citing Batson, 476 U.S. at 96-98 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 ). *805 First, a defendant is required to “establish a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination[.]” Pona II, 66 A.3d at 472 (quoting Pona I, 926 A.2d at 601 ). 2014The United States Supreme Court has “delineated a tripartite test for determining whether a criminal defendant has been denied equal protection of the laws by the state’s use of a peremptory challenge.” Pona I, 926 A.2d at 601 (citing Batson, 476 U.S. at 96-98 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 ). *805 First, a defendant is required to “establish a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination[.]” Pona II, 66 A.3d at 472 (quoting Pona I, 926 A.2d at 601 ). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
George v. Fadiani
green
1 sentence2006The Rhode Island Supreme Court has set forth a tripartite test for determining when collateral estoppel should be applied: "there must be an identity of issues; the prior proceeding must have resulted in a final judgment on the merits; and the party against whom collateral estoppel is sought must be the same as or in privity with the party in the prior proceeding." Id. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
United States v. Femia
green
1 sentence1994Together Trombetta and Youngblood established a tripartite test to determine whether a defendant’s due-process rights have been infringed by the failure of law enforcement personnel to preserve evidence. 9 F.3d at 993 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.